axel

SMDb is the current european version of the SMQV. It is limited to 50 mW output power. I think it is fully compatible with US Versions of any 400 mode Lectro receivers. But don't use European receivers with US type transmitters, that combo is not fully functional.

hi Vas, very curious, too I am hoping for the baby to arrive next week. pleaaase, Aaton! I want to switch over to record my ongoing TV series on Cantar X3 from May 26 onwards. I'll keep you informed...

hey, thanks for this video. hope to hold this baby in my hands soon.

I googled, X3 is 3,55 kilos without batts, 4 kgs with 2 batts attached. I know your SX-R4 is one fourth of it :-) with a full load of Rx and acessories you carry around 7-8 kgs on the front. But with the batteries on the back the weight is well balanced. from tomorrow I will shoot a doc in Turkey with Cantar X1 - same weight - and I love to use it.

I think X3's portability will mostly depend on how much energy it needs. But weight wise it is playing in the same league with 788T/CL8, 664, 688...

imo this bag does not look like it was designed for Cantar. If accessories (RF receivers) are put in front of the Cantar, the access to the inputs will be blocked. the left side flap must remain open to access the the rotary selector. It should at least fold down in the middle. The mesh devider blocks the fader panel... Cantar is not a brick style recorder and it requires a different bag concept. But I think all bags designed for X1/X2 versions will remain pretty usable also with X3.

I am really satisfied with my SX-R4, but it is limited as it has no mixing capabilities. So I am very curious what is the new mixing philosophy behind the SX-R4+. From Charles Tomaras I understood like preamps are recorded directly without further amplification (?), which would mean very low ISO tracks. This approach presents a mighty mix against shy ISOs which is a good presentation for our mix, but for post it would be quite a step to go into ISO level. I wonder how they will like the concept. For my on-set mix up to these days I have tried to get decent levels on my ISOs and only attenuate them mixing them together. I like the idea to mix = to let gradually go, what I dont need. Maybe it is something weird, but the other way round I always end up in the output limiters, out of control. But with a machine like the SX-R4+ my whole mixing system won't work anymore. How do all of you feel against this concept? Or did I get something wrong? And thanks by the way for all the pics and videos!!!

old R4 TC clock: Pierre from Sonosax told me, that the (old) R4 TC generator is part of it's mainboard. No complaints since the 4.1xx update (2012?). Until then the clock was very accurate like 0,02 frames in 6 hs even in the very cold, I actually tested it in the freezer when I got it. But before software 4.1x there were intermittent faults of far more than one frame during some shoots. R4 preamps are still great. And it is so lightwight and energy efficient. I am curious about that new new concept of mixing without input trims. Does this mean isos around -40dBFS?

A charger should be included with any new Cantar X3. I guess it will be this one. X3's batteries show a few Whs extra compared to similar sized Audioroot batts, lets see if they can be exchanged with Audioroot's batts and chargers

I did not test exterior, just swinging the boom int. pretty fast with bare mic with and without windshield/foam which is a key application for me. Maybe thats why I did not experience this "overload of preamp stage" and the conclusion was made too soon? best, Axel

I had the chance to test the 8017 C last year for my Austrian friend Roland and I did some A/B testing against a Senngheiser 8060 and a Neumann KMR 81. I don't own a CMIT, would have been informative, too: http://www.axeltraun.at/downloads.html You can download the testfiles from my homepage, it's a zip file on the bottom of the page, containing 4 tests, sorry my blahblah on the tracks is entirely german: Test setup was 788T with CL9, Tracks A/B, same settings on each channel, both mics attached to the UH400a Lectros. It was a day off from a shoot and I used the shooting setup. Those are the MP3 tracks (48 khz, sorry) : "1_dpa4017li_vs_Senn8060re_48khz" dpa 8017C left vs Sennheiser 8060 right: first 5 or so minutes are with equal gain settings, resulting the 8017 is -8dB lower compared to the 8060, later I put up the gain of the DPA. If you got an A/B monitoring option for the left and right tracks of an mp3 you can pretty well compare the sound in several situations. If you are unsure what it is about, please ask. The result in short is: 8060 shows more sibilance, but without the brutal fizzling of the older MKH 416 sister mic; it has more punch, peels voices out of their surrounding, makes them sound a littler bigger than life in the closeup, even in 1,5 meters over head (5 ft) it still can deliver closeup sound, provided the room acoustics is OK. I very much like it for the TV shows I am doing. 8017 is more neutral and elegant, almost no center/side, On/OFF effect within 15 deg aberration from the axis, going further OFF axis than about 50 deg there comes a sudden drop in level. 4017 for me is very well suited for calm environments, good for a fast boom op to get all the voices with one mike, has more the feel of a short hypercardioid over a shotgun. The voices sound slimmer and elegant. less punch. "2_dpa4017li_vs_Senn8060re_beide_mit_WS+Wind_48khz" Same mics, same setup, this time it is about wind and handling noise: The DPA copes way better with wind, even with NO foam attached to the mic I can swing the boom quite fast. The 8060 is very susceptible to wind noise. It's genuine foam heavily alters the sound, I can tell if the boom operator has the foam attached to his mike, without AB-ing or seing it. In a Rycote basket with windjammer the 8060 is still prone to wind noise. DPA 8017 is another class . "3_dpa4017_li_vs_NeumKMR81i_re_48khz" The DPA 4017 delivers 2 dB more gain than the KMR 81i, on this test initially the low pass filter on the 4017 is activated for a little more sibilance. 4017 sounds like a little more open. In the begin of the test the mics are separated by 10 cm, after 2:30 I moved the mics on the same axis one over the other. Low pass of the DPA is turned off at 4:30, resulting the KMR81 presenting more sibilance than 4017. DPA 4017 with low pass is like Neumann KMR81 with flat setting (no low pass available). The neumann is more susceptible to cable issues and interference, DPA 4017 behaves very straightforward and error free. at 9:30 the plug on tx are exchanged which finds me confused which mic is which channel (A/B sides change, but I did not aknowledge it during the test) "4_Plugonvergleich_mit_2x_8060_48khz" left/right track A/B comparison of my two UH 400 plug on transmitters mounted with 2 identical sennheiser 8060: outcome in short: equipped with the same type of mics they are equally sounding and deliver equal gain.

Just for in case somebody ever needs this solution: It is possible to provide 12 V DC from the Lectrosonics Octopack to an amplified Antenna (here: ALP 650) through an HF 4 way splitter: Sennheiser ASP 114 does the Job. http://en-us.sennheiser.com/asp-114 According to specs the splitter attentuates the signal by about 8 dB, you need to set the Antenna jumpers accordingly. What it is for: For the next job I will use 2 wireless Booms and up to 9 wireless Lavs, all Lectrosonics. I will work most times from the cart, but need to be mobile in case. On the cart I want to feed 4x SRa and SRb units in the Octopack and 3 additional 411a units in the same bag with the 2 x ALP 650 HF signals. I found the Lectrosonics recommended HF Splitters like ZFSC41 block the 12 V DC, that can be provided by the Octopack. I wanted to avoid the cable mess of 2 additional Bias T units with DC cables between the splitters and the antennas just for powering both ALP 650s. Now I got a ASP 114 and tested it: Antenna distro works, same with Antenna powering in the opposite direction. Although the Sennheiser ASP114 unit is significantly bigger than it's Lectro recommended ZFSC41 counterpart, the whole setup will result same size and less complicated. Pricewise both solutions (Bias T + ZFSC41/ASP 114) are about the same.

first time I looked into the donate thread, here are my 20 $ for this year. I am glad there is a site like this! all the best to you, Jeff

you can come over to 23 rd district and we can have a coffee. I got two 8060s and we can compare your mic to them, if u like. www.axeltraun.at

@Jeff and Constantin: You are certainly right, never give up trusting your ears. But that is the problem: Just only the B6's in my LAV Box sum up to 12 units, that is where AB testing is getting a complex task. And (for worse) the outcome is always disturbing: because they never sound identical, and this is not limited to the B6 only! I guess it is a matter of wear and tear over time. For my peace of mind I have stopped ABing all my Lavs. If I experience acoustic issues with one, in a quiet moment I quickly test it whith the bah-bah-essesss-yellingyelling-listen-to-the-ambience test and if it sounds like OK it goes back to the others. I know some units from experience that have a certain sound colour and I try to use them on specific actors throughout the production if the combo has proven to work out well, but this is kind of voodoo as there are so many variables in the game. So it would be a tempting idea to see an up-to-date frequency response chart for each Lav, because it would provide a good base to compare the listening experience of almost 30 units and to really be able to classify what I can hear in a more standardized way. But if situated within the 1000€+ category, this investment it is way down on the list ;-)

in my experience the placement of a Lav is so much more important to how it sounds than it's actual frequency response under testing conditions So it might be difficult for post to claim the Lav has been defective. On the other hand I think Lavs ARE to be considered somehow as the disposables. AB testing often shows differences, but I keep them as long as they sound acceptable for me. I would never purchase a used Lav on ebay though. Can anyone suggest a test bench arrangement for Lavs we could set up with a PC and some dedicated software?

I like the first vid, you can actually listen to the mix he is doing. But I think the image is flipped left /right (mirrored). You start - stop the Cantar at the very right side of the machine and for me it would be natural to have the boom at the leftmost fader (which I guess he is having)

there are actors (mostly female) who have these types of sibilants. maybe deep in their subconscience they might be concerned about not be heard. But that ist some personal guess only. In my experience this pattern comes along with fast speakers and rather low voices. as a location sound guy, I can .) use mics with less high freq boost for those actors. Sennheiser 416 and to less extent 8060 shotguns put additional emphasis on ssss frequencies, which is helpful for intellegibility of dialogue, but also boosts those unwanted sibilants. A foam windshield on a 8060 already helps a little, using e.g. a Neumann, Schoeps or DPA Shotgun is better. Nevertheless I love my 8060s for their punch and clarity even from the distance, but they are only 2nd choice for sizzling speakers. .) make use of the EQ. Start trying around 7500 - 8000 hz, -3 dB Q= 1 .) hidden Lavs are less susceptible to sizzling SSS nouns, cardioids are also doing better, shotguns are worse as they pick up most of the esses energy best Axel

hi, any Zaxcoms with recording option. I put the Tx/recorder in a waterproof pouch on the harness or on a separate belt, depends on the climber's wish. I got best resuts wiring the helmets and used some hose strap I stiched on the back of the helmet's headband on one side and to the pouch on the other, inside the hose I ran the mic wire. This keeps the helmet fixed to the climber and he can't tear tear the mic cable taking off his hardhead. To get rid of the helmet, he has to take off the pouch, this keeps your unit safely in one piece. Remember that climbers have other things to worry about but your mikes. It is easy to hide the hose strap under the costume. If you see some part of it, it looks like just another piece of climbing gear. Think about good wind protection and choose the helmets together with costume or props. For expeditions the Zaxcoms ZFR 100 we use last for 12+ hs with one battery load, but there is no monitoring option. I also did bigwall climbing movie with Lectros and an amplified Antenna system, but this works only in line of sight and if you got to get into the wall yourself because of range issues, things may get a bit complicated. all the best Axel www.axeltraun.at

yes, it has been fixed two SW updates ago. all the best Axel

I usually stick/glue some furry hair to the cable with 2 cm wide ultra thin medical paper tape. pretty quick and solid all day construction, but sometimes difficult to remove. So the windjammers often stay on the mics till the end of the exterior scene/shooting day/ week ;-) Axel

one more: I'ver been using Sennheiser "tourguide" receivers for IFB monitoring for the last five years. cheap solution, fully compatible with the G2+G3 transmitters; good range, a little less fidelity compared to G2/G3 receivers, but very rugged and dead simple: one knob to turn for volume + on/OFF; listeners can hop through preset channels with a second switch like on lectro IFB. latter feauture can be locked. Same form factor as the G2/G3 pocket receivers. one headphone output, display showing channel or frequency and battery state. 2 AA nimh work for one shooting day. current model is named "EK 1039"and has a double freqency range (2 blocks wide, compared to older G2 units). I use 8 of them for IFB along with 4 pairs of G2+G3 tx/rx for camera hops, playback speakers, IFB tx ... best Axel

Oh wow! Eric, you are the hero!! I hope it is NO touchscreen. But I am pretty sure its not. Against the philosophy of working with gloves. I still love the rotary modulometers of my X1 Cantar (1 db increments, pretty cool in + out routing info at one glance), but the big screen might be really informative. Add a keyboard and you are fit for Metadata. Maybe power hungry, right. I also hope it is 10 analog ins (2 x XLR5 would be perfectly OK, also 4 ins could be line level, but the gain setting should be easily accessible); but why then only 8 input fader knobs? 10 analog ins and 12 tracks was what was announced, somehow... 10 analogue inputs with individual fader pots is what I was hoping for. Form: I think it is the same footprint as the X1/X2. which is going well in the bag. Just a little different concept. I still like to shoot documentaries with that setup. Same class as a 664, footprint and weightwise. best Axel